Michaelsguardian.blogspot.com - A travel in scripture, Bible prophecy and the Word of our God and our Lord Jesus Christ through the eyes and soul of the last witness and chosen vessel, Michael surnamed Jackson

God: Reconnect to Him

The Conspiracy against God is about "The Word", and the profaning of His Holy Name within us. Adam fell in the garden, breaking the direct connection to God.
Jesus, the "last Adam" was a quickening Spirit, the Word made Flesh, and the only one with whom we can re-establish our relationship with God.
Michael's story is still unfolding. He is the one who is, is not.
But Jesus is the only name given under heaven by which we must be saved. Many are trying to rewrite HIStory.
We were given a help to instruct us. Learn more "here".

Saturday, July 17, 2010

The O2 Press Conference - Comparing Photos

July 16, 2010 – The O2 Press Conference

On March 5, 2009, Michael made an appearance at a press conference at the 02 to announce his upcoming “This is It” Tour. So much speculation about this particular event has been marching across the chat rooms and message forums.

There are several different topics we can pull apart and dissect about this event and one of them is the blog on this topic here: Thelowlynewshound

The Lowlynewshound has been taken down, both the blog and the associated Twitter account. Charles has since been on the attack on Twitter, I've had to block him from my Facebook page, report him to my ISP for spam because of the emails, and has spammed the Michael support sites with his vitriol. We won't even talk about the language that was used...

I should point out that it has been brought to my attention that Charles Thompson and the Lowlynewshound are one and the same. Charles Thompson has a blog at this location:

When reading the lowly newshound which was written almost as if the writer were a paid blogger for Sony, it stops at the time of his death, not long after, and has not been updated since September of 2009 with the announced “This is It” movie/documentary. The blog’s inception was in March of 2008 which by the looks of Charles’s picture was about when he graduated from high school. (You have a baby face, Charles!) In contrast the Charles Thompson blog’s first post was in July of 2009 and the last update was May 13, 2010. What happened in June of 2009?

Change of micro-chip?

I would really like to know who is behind the Lowlynewshound blog. The information in it is false. Several points about Michael’s 02 Concert announcement is that much of his claims of sources are from Sony. Reports on that blog of Michael baracading himself in his hotel room, of Michael coming back drunk, I couldn't believe it.

Well, if Sony is his source, then the vein in which the reports on Michael Jackson is written makes all the sense in the world. This is the same company that has been battling Michael over the catalog he allowed them to buy into back in 1995. Of course they are going to be fair and impartial.

One of the comments to the lowlynewshound is a topic we have entertained before, if not on this blog, in email and private messages.

One poster said:

“(Quoting the blog entry)This story was later contradicted by reports that before Jackson took the stage for his announcement, he became the first person to walk around the O2's new exhibition, the 'British Music Experience'.

This was self-serving spin designed to accomplish two goals. The first was to give the impression that Jackson had been at the O2 centre all along, distracting press from the real reason for his lateness, and the second was to shamelessly promote the complex's latest attraction.”

MJ TII 69 June 23 - Again same outfit, same day. Were they deflating him? He has eyelids here but not above, nose is rounded above.

Doubles?

Michael next to Navi

Comparables:

Remember, we were told that most of this footage was over a the last three days before he died. The same outfits on the same day verify that, however, Michael looks decidedly different when comparing the photos.

The same with the O2 conference photos. The difference in the size of Michael's hands and shape of fingers and size of his wrists in April as compared to June at the O2 when Michael was supposed to be smaller, weight wise.

What I wanted to compare is the reported deterioration of Michael, but he looks much healthier in some photos than others and on the same day (same outfit). Also, at the O2 Press Conference, what made me to a double-take was the shape of this Michael’s mouth, the size of his hands and the length and thickness of his fingers (his fingers had gotten thicker with age). Someone had mentioned to me latex overlay before for the hands, as used in “Ghosts”.

I do not believe that the O2 Press Conference was the real Michael. A video below, take note of “Michael’s voice, demeanor, he raises his eyebrows twice while talking. This is not a natural “speech” expression of Michael’s. Also his mannerisms and his walk. This is not Michael and speculation as to him being late range from, he didn’t want to go and they had to find a double, to, he was walking around the exhibits in the O2.

31 comments:

I do think he used doubles, however I don't believe that any of these photos are doubles. The press conference was without a doubt Michael. You can't fake the smile, look at the teeth. I think he used doubles sometimes to distract people, but in some of these pictures he's with his children. Angles and lighting can make someone look different. These pictures are all Michael.

I would also like to point something out that has nothing to do with this blog post. There is already a connection to Randy Phillips from Tohme. Anschutz and Barrack don't HAVE to be involved. Randy Phillips and Tohme were once in-laws, they knew each other. It was through Thome that Randy signed Michael up for the 50 shows. Michael told many people he didn't like Randy Phillips and he didn't want to do 50 shows, he told some of his fans this as well. Why would Michael tell his fans something like that knowing he was going to fake his death? He would have known they would suspect AEG. To me that would be cruel to AEG, and the fans. Why would he want them to worry for nothing and make them think he wasn't being treated right? It was Randy Phillips that said it made sense to sell TII to SONY.

Faking his death would only make sense if he was trying to expose Sony and Branca. If that were the case why have everything go to Sony? Sony hasn't committed a crime if Michael's not dead. They are rightfully buying what is sold to them. Someone ELSE is selling it. Branca. Why fake your death to expose ONE person? He didn't have to have Branca work for him if he suspected him. Him simply would not have anything to do with him.

There was a mole in Michael's life for years, but the question is, who?

I disagree MicheleKC - You can fake teeth, Michael did it all the time. Randy talked about him wearing these rediculous fake, ugly teeth as part of a disguise. That smile is not Michael's smile. If you click on the pictures then put your cursor over them some of them will let you enlarge them.

The press Conference, if you look at the distance between his upper lip and his nose, that clinched it for me, not to mention the video which I have posted up there. Michael has never acted like that, throwing his arms up at the end like he was challenging somebody. He has always been very poised on stage.

I realize angles and lighting can do things, I used to draw portraits of people, but there are details like distance between features, skin texture, contour of jaw that are tip offs.

Even Karen Faye had alluded to the possibility of an impersonator standing in for Michael because he did not want to go (her version of what happened).

Michael has always had more space between the nose and upper lip. Look at that and tell me what you think.

Michele, I know about the supposed connection between Randy Phillips and Tohme. That would not be too surprising since Tohme and Barrack are friends and Barrack and Anschutz are friends. Somebody probably introduced them. I do know according to Barrack interviews that Michael knew Barrack long before he knew Tohme. Tohme did not come along until later. There is also a possibility that as a result, Michael also knew Anschutz before he knew Tohme. They had a meeting before Michael even announced that Tohme worked for him.

AEG would have to be in on it, since they are the ones providing the cover. It's not cruelty if they all know and planned on it.

We can't depend on the headlines, we have to look at the evidence. Where is the evidence that AEG or Colony did anything wrong? We already have documents about Branca and Sony's sin is all over Youtube, thanks to Michael Jackson.

Michael said he didn't want to do 50 shows. Did he lie? No. But it does look like he knew he was never going to do them. Somebody sharing an ex-inlaw is not evidence of anything other than someone got a divorce. My guess is, there was a good reason.

Do you really believe that Michael hired Branca back? I don't. I think Branca was brought in By Sony as a condition of allowing Michael to peform songs still under their label . . . same with DiLeo. I do not think Michael hired them back himself. I also believe that AEG allowed this (obviously) but not for the reasons we were all led to believe.

There was an interview with Randy Phillips were he acted like he didn't know who Tohme was. There's an interview on youtube with Frank Dileo, when asked about Tohme he get's visibly nervous. I saw it in the lump in his throat, the movement of his hands, and the fact that he avoided the question completely. He pretended he thought the question was about Dr. Murray, the interviewer corrected him and he still talked about Murry. Frank, if Michael's alive HAS to be a "good guy" He says he saw Michael's body, but what was he hiding in that interview?

Randy Phillips, Frank Dileo seem to stick up for each other. Yes, I believe AEG had something to do with Michael's death. I don't know if it's owner is involved.

The fans that spoke to Michael said he was on the verge of tears. WHY would he want to hurt them and make them worry? I DON'T think he was a cruel person at ALL.

Randy Phillips said he's known Michael for 20 years, I don't think they are friends. An interview with Barrack said his kids would visit Neverland for field days with a bunch of other kids. Again, I don't think he was Michael's friend.

Many things stood out for me about "Michael" at this press conference. His posture - often bent forward from the base of the neck, an ungraceful and rather lumbering walk in the hallway. Why did he approach then talk to the MC twice, the 2nd time being pointed toward the microphone as though he didn't know what he was supposed to do? Many times he thrust his fist into the air (black power?), lots of gestures filling the time. He moved to our left of the podium for no apparent reason other than to gather applause - not consistent behavior with the Michael I've seen. Then to the left again, seemingly happy for the escape from the mic - chanting "This is it" with the crowd. He seemed to avoid the microphone as much as possible and had very little to say, nothing of substance. Several times a fan yelled "I love you Michael". (I didn't hear it in this version.) Not once did he say "I love you more". His voice was deeper in the beginning - "Um...", moved the mic a few inches higher, "Thank you all." pause, then he cleared his throat and adjusted to a higher pitch. The facial features are "blocky" and angular. This is really apparent when you then see a picture or video known to be Michael - his features are softer. You could see the same prominent cheek bones and (I think I saw) same enlarged pinky joint as in the 2nd green jacket photo. The statement that this was the last time he'd be performing in London seemed odd, as though he would perform other places in the future. Yet, it's the "final curtain call"? Cryptic or blunders? Basically this person was awkward, graceless and appeared very out of his element. These are just my "picking it apart" observations.

The green jacket photos - looks like arthritis in the left pinky finger of 2nd pic. I read that Michael borrowed this $10,000 designer jacket from Klein and he has sued the estate to get it back. (Apparently another TMZ exclusive.) "Klein is not asking for any money, but wants his threads back." Gee, what a great guy to not go for monetary damages! Is it Klein's? Has he sued the estate? I don't know. But it's huge on Michael and it's ugly, I don't know why he would want it or wear it in public. You can bet that if/when Klein gets it back it will be worth scads more than $10,000 since it has been shown with "Michael" wearing it. Gee, TMZ even helped Arnie out with the starting price! Isn't it awfully convenient that Arnie happened to pose in this jacket before Michael supposedly borrowed it?http://www.tmz.com/2010/02/20/arnie-klein-jacket-michael-jackson-designer-gianfranco-ferre-creditors-claim/

Speaking of jackets, I thought I saw Michael wearing the o2 jacket in the rehearsals, struck me as odd.

Wow, he was only asked the day before to present Michael...have to wonder what's up with that! Michael was a pro. Surely he would know the status of a teleprompter? Strange and getting stranger. Some good info on that video, thanks!

I will read the other comments above later but just wanted to say, from the best of my opinion, that was Michael. His diction was the same, his voice was actually the same. Michael had a four-octave range, he was capable of hitting bass (listen to Seth Riggs vocal exercises with him on YouTube). As Michael got older he spoke less child-like and there are numerous videos out there that support this. I always thought Michael sort of sounded like he had a cold during the press conference which could have made his voice sound a bit deeper, but to me it still sounds like him, and when you hear his laugh in the background, sounds just like his giggle--it is his giggle. Michael sounded irritated, like he did not want to be there and he did not sound excited about these shows--the only thing that made him step back and enjoy the moment were his fans.

Regarding the changes in his face, I believe it was from his many trips to Klein's office. Klein's statement to the Estate claims he was using some botox but mostly the filler Restylane which were basically used on every visit. Klein said he was filling his face from a lack of fat in his face, from acne and lupus scarring--and I believe him because the transition is obvious. So, when Michael appeared to be losing weight in in June, his face remained the same, or better, from the fillers, IMO.

Personally, Navi could not serve as a "double" to me, they look nothing alike. E'Casanova favors Michael a lot, especially his smile, but his eyes are nothing like Michael's. As for why Michael may look so different in some photos, one must account for a) lighting and the angling of lighting and b) the possibility of photoshopping.

Also going totally off topic here.http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100717/ap_en_ot/us_people_lucille_ball

Read today that Lucille Ball's daughter went to court to get some things back from an auctioneer selling her mother's awards. It's a shame MJ3 aren't old enough to make their own decisions concerning some of their father's stuff that has gone or will go to auction.

Michele - Thank you for that video. That was interesting. I do occasionally check past comments on blogs, but I don't get over there often because I get backlogged. When it gets slow again I check :o)

Truthbtold2all - I know green jacket was Klein's. Is he that much bigger than Michael? Also on the bigger green jacket picture, Michael's hands are different . . . much smaller wrist bone, finger nail beds shorter hand texture wrong, edge of palm??? Also face, Michael has tattooed eyeliner, not the chunky makeup job we see here. Plus his cheeks look like a puffy lady's cheeks. Agree with you on O2 of him. Boxy, severe features, chin and jaw.

sas1253 - saw the video . . . Michael was "ripped"??? Really? Ripped . . . as in muscular? As in back muscles? What did you think about that?

Nikki - Thank you. I answered this when you posted it on my wall (or someone's wall). Did you watch that video? What did you think about Michael being "ripped"? LOL!

sas1253 - I did not know what to think about that "neck" picture. Either it's not Michael, or he has prosthetic makeup on and his trying it out for a stroll on the town, or Yoko Ono is impersonating Michael Jackson (Sorry Yoko!)

IF I believe that was MJ at the O2, then maybe Dermot described him as being ripped as in "When he hugged me, it was a strong hug, not a wimpy one, as I would have expected." Or maybe MJ's jacket was padded. He wasn't as thin back then as he was at the end, was he?

If I DON'T believe that was MJ at the O2, then who knows, maybe the guy was really muscular under that jacket.

MJ was muscular all his life with all that dancing and practicing he did. He couldn't have lost EVERYTHING in the latter years, could he? According to Lou Ferrigno, he was getting back in shape and was doing OK.

I just found the video amusing as I think Dermot O'Leary was just trying to figure out how the heck he got to be onstage with the King of Pop! (or the non-King of Pop, whatever the case may be :o) )

In TII, Michael arrives at O2 for the announcement in March in the golf cart with a big smile on his face (having transferred from the van), but in the O'Leary vid, Michael walks into "backstage", after leaving the van, briefly sees the golf cart with no one in it, and walks the rest of the way to the stage on his own. Whether this was or was not Michael (I do think it was Michael, by the way), it caused me again to think about what other "edits" were done in TII to portray Michael in the best light they could find, showing nothing negative. Hummmmm........

I am aware that Michael used doubles throughout his life, but I wasn't aware that doubles were used to mark appearances for him, talk for him, and dance for him. Who could dance and sing like Michael? We would be able to tell. If they did use a double for the O2 appearance, it was very brave of them because they risk people finding out about it. And why would they have a double in TII to rehearse with everyone if it isn't this doubles show? It was Michaels show. I dont see how they could rehearse Michaels parts without Michael.

I'm not saying it isn't a possibility, but it doesn't make sense to me.

Michael was always changing. He had gone through many changes making him appear and look slightly different throughout the years. He had a lot of skin problems and medical problems. Who knows what the explanation is for him looking different. I guess it could be true, but then again, we weren't there and will never fully know.

I think it's possible doubles were used in TII at times the dancers needed to rehearse with someone in Michael's spot (not necessarily Michael, though). However, I don't think doubles could be used to talk for him or dance for him, no of course not. When I think of TII, I would not be willing to say every shot purported to be Michael WAS, in fact, Michael, as there were many "distance" shots where someone oculd have stood in for him. I do feel, however, that the March O2 announcement was Michael.

I really can't say if Charles Thomson and the Lowly Newhound are the same person, but in my opinion the tone of the writing styles of these two blogs seems drastically different. As Charles asked you, do you have proof of this? If not it's just rumor and speculation.

I also want to point out that Charles Thomson interviewed Aphrodite Jones in 2008 for her life and work including the book "Michael Jackson Conspiracy". Much attention was given about the unfair treatment of MJ during the trial and Aphrodite's difficulty in getting the book published till she decided to self published.

He has the article posted at his website.

http://www.charles-thomson.net/aphrodite.html

At that time Aphrodite was finding it difficult to even promote the book so I definately feel he's tried to be objective about MJ especially about the 2005 trial. I don't know if he is an MJ fan or an admirer but as a journalist he has in my opinion shown much objectivity.

Mabela - Yes, I know. It was deleted last night amidst all the activity from Charles and Randy T. He threatens me, then removes the proof he wants me to present. Any other mention of that man on this blog will be deleted.

Now he has people writing me to explain why he had to stay anonymous. He lied then attacked me for revealing it, threatened me. I am done discussing this. I have not responded to his threats and I have not been attacking him. Others have, however in defending me. I don't condone that, but if he would grow up, he wouldn't be getting the responses he has been getting.

I'm convinced that on the O2 conference it was not Michael.Not only for the physical differences but mainly for his attitude.I have never saw Michael doing that kind of strange movements he did on stage. He didn't act as Michael. Also the short speach I think it has to do with that.My opinion.

beatriz - You saw that too! I agree, the mannerisms were off. He did seem like he wanted top make "the appearance" and get off stage as soon as possible. He seemed nervous about speaking, not like Michael at all

For the physical appearence on the press ocnference, it was TOTALY MJ.u can clearly said that from the wrist, which is HIS wrist 8 i saw other pictures of mj of years before, on mjjpictures and the wrist is the same.Plus his voice it's like the 2006 wma, and the 1993 superbowls.And the mannersim means nothing to me

I FORGOT TO SAY THAT i DON'T SEE ANY OTHER DIFFERENCE APART OF THE MANNERISM.and yes he used doubles(and we KNEW THAT9 but at the confernce?NO WAYYYYY all the FANS would know that since the beginning(when he appeared on stage).And Bonnie,it was ALL Michael, I can see clearly-

I believe it was Michael at the O2. Mainly because of his voice. It's distinct.His mannerisms were weird and off. But just think.. he's been out of sight for years and now he had to announce his comeback which he didn't want to do. He would have been under immense pressure, stress and anxiety. For all we know he was under medication just so he could get through this announcement. That medication could have resulted in strange behavior like we saw. :-(

About Me

We are living in Biblically significant Times. Ironically it was the most persecuted man in modern history that lead me to dig deeper into the Bible and taught me more about God than any other human being on the planet. And that man is Michael Jackson.
I started a blog to defend him. I ended up researching him and learned just why they were after him. They did everything they could to shut him down. In the song "Cry" he said "take over for me", so that is what I am doing. God bless that man and his faith and strength

Michael And God

"Like the Bible says. A child should be leader of them all, and to be led by that kind of innocence. Didn't Jesus say 'bring on the children?' Be like the children. Not childish, but child-like. That kind of innocence."

Michael Jackson in the Martin Bashir outtakes

"Children show me in their playful smiles the divine in everyone. This simple goodness shines straight from their hearts and only asks to be lived." Michael Jackson Oprah Winfrey Interview

"I avoid using the term 'religion', because many people say 'my religion' this and 'my religion' that. Why should it be 'my' religion? I just believe what’s in the Bible with regard to which religion is involved. I simply believe.... I believe in it and I get down on my knees every night and thank God and ask Him to lead the way."

1979 Ebony Magazine interview

COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER

Copyright disclaimer; Under section 107 of the copyright act of 1976 allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, commenting, news reporting, teaching, scholarship research, etc. This site may contain copyrighted material

the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is used solely for the purpose of private study and research which constitutes 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

Fair use is permitted by copyright stature

that might otherwise be infringing. Non profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of “fair use.” The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have interest in receiving the included information for their own research and study.